The English translation of the Bhikkhu-vibhanga: the first part of the Suttavibhanga, which itself is the first book of the Pali Vinaya Pitaka, one of the three major ‘baskets’ of Therevada canonical literature. It is a collection of rules for Buddhist monks.
The English translation of the Vinaya-pitaka (first part, bhikkhu-vibhanga) contains many...

Monks’ Expulsion (Pārājika) 3: Permutations

Summary

Bu-Pj.3.4.1MS.416 Oneself, having resolved,[1] by a messenger, by a series of messengers, by a messenger who does not follow instructions,[2] by a messenger gone and returned again.

Not in private, but perceiving it as private; in private, but perceiving it as not private; not in private, and perceiving it as not private; in private, and perceiving it as private.

He praises by means of the body; he praises by means of speech; he praises by means of both the body and speech; he praises by means of a messenger; he praises by means of a writing.[3]

A pit, a piece of furniture,[4] placing near, medicine, arranging a sight, arranging a sound, arranging a smell, arranging a taste, arranging a touch, arranging dhamma, announcement, instruction, making an arranged action,[5] making a sign.

Exposition

Bu-Pj.3.4.2BD.1.129MS.417Oneself means: one oneself kills by means of the body or by means of something attached to the body or by means of something released.

By a messenger

MS.419 If a monk tells a second monk, “Kill so-and-so,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If the second monk kills that person,[6] thinking he is the one he was told to kill, there is an offence entailing expulsion for both.

MS.420 If a monk tells a second monk, “kill so-and-so,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If the second monk kills someone else, thinking he is the one he was told to kill, there is no offence for the instigator, but there is an offence entailing expulsion for the murderer.

MS.421 If a monk tells a second monk … If the second monk kills that person, thinking it is someone else than the one he was told to kill, there is an offence entailing expulsion for both.

MS.422 If a monk tells a second monk … If the second monk kills someone else, thinking it is someone else than the one he was told to kill, there is no offence for the instigator, but there is an offence entailing expulsion for the murderer.

By a series of messengers

MS.423 If a monk tells a second monk, “tell so-and-so to tell so-and-so to kill so-and-so,” there is an offence of bad conduct. In informing the next person, there is an offence of bad conduct. If the (potential) murderer accepts, there is a serious offence for the instigator. If he kills that person, there is an offence entailing expulsion for all of them.

By a messenger who does not follow instructions

MS.424 If a monk tells a second monk, “tell so-and-so to tell so-and-so to kill so-and-so,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If the second monk tells someone else than the one he was told to tell, there is an offence of bad conduct. If the (potential) murderer accepts, there is an offence of bad conduct. If he kills that person, there is no offence for the instigator, but there is an offence entailing expulsion for the conveyor of the message and for the murderer.

By a messenger gone and returned again

MS.425 If a monk tells a second monk, “kill so-and-so,” there is an offence of bad conduct. BD.1.130 He goes, but returns, saying, “I was not able to kill him.” If the first monk tells him again, “when you are able, then kill him,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If the second monk kills that person, there is an offence entailing expulsion for both.

MS.426 If a monk tells a second monk, “kill so-and-so,” there is an offence of bad conduct. He then becomes remorseful, but does not say, “do not kill him.” If the second monk then kills that person, there is an offence entailing expulsion for both.

MS.427 If a monk tells a second monk, “kill so-and-so,” there is an offence of bad conduct. He then becomes remorseful and says, “do not kill him.” If the second monk replies, “I have been told by you to do so,” and then kills that person, there is no offence for the instigator, but there is an offence entailing expulsion for the murderer.

MS.428 If a monk tells a second monk … He then becomes remorseful and says, “do not kill him.” If the second monk replies, “very well,” and desists, there is no offence for either.

Bu-Pj.3.4.3MS.429Not in private, but perceiving it as private, he says aloud, “if only so-and-so were killed,” there is an offence of bad conduct. In private, but perceiving it as not private, he says aloud, “if only so-and-so were killed,” there is an offence of bad conduct. Not in private, and perceiving it as not private, he says aloud, Vin.3.76 “if only so-and-so were killed,” there is an offence of bad conduct. In private, and perceiving it as private, he says aloud, “if only so-and-so were killed,” there is an offence of bad conduct.

Bu-Pj.3.4.4MS.430He praises by means of the body means: in making a gesture with the body,[7] which effectively says, “Whoever dies thus,[8] receives wealth, fame or goes to heaven,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If, because of that praise, the target person thinks, “I shall die,” and he does what is painful, there is a serious offence.[9] If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

BD.1.131MS.431He praises by means of speech means: in saying, “whoever dies thus …” … If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

MS.432He praises by means of the body and speech means: in making a gesture with the body and saying, “whoever dies thus …” … If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

MS.433He praises by means of a messenger means: in giving instructions to a messenger, saying, “whoever dies thus, receives wealth, fame or goes to heaven,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If, having heard the messenger’s instruction, the target person thinks, “I shall die,” and he does what is painful, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

MS.434He praises by means of a writing means: in writing:[10] “Whoever dies thus, receives wealth, BD.1.132 fame or goes to heaven,” there is an offence of bad conduct for each character.[11] If, having seen the writing, the target person thinks, “I shall die,” and he does what is painful, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

Bu-Pj.3.4.5MS.435A pit means: in digging a pit for people, thinking, “falling into it someone will die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If a person falls into it, there is an offence of bad conduct. If, when he has fallen, he experiences pain, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

In digging a non-specific pit, thinking, “whatever falls in will die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If a person falls into it, there is an offence of bad conduct. If, when he has fallen, he experiences pain, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion. If a spirit, ghost or animal in human form[12] falls into it, there is an offence of bad conduct.[13] If, when it has fallen, it experiences pain, there is an offence of bad conduct. If it dies, there is a serious offence. If an animal falls into it, there is an offence of bad conduct. If, when it has fallen, it experiences pain BD.1.133 , there is an offence of bad conduct. If it dies, there is an offence entailing confession.[14]

Bu-Pj.3.4.6MS.436A piece of furniture means: if he places a dagger in a piece of furniture, smears the furniture with poison or makes it weak, or if he places it near a lake, a pit or a cliff, thinking, “falling down, he will die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If the target person experiences pain on account of the dagger or the poison or the fall, there is a serious offence. Vin.3.77 If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

Bu-Pj.3.4.7MS.437Placing near means: if he places a knife, a dagger, an arrow, a club, a stone, a sword, poison or a rope[15] near him, thinking, “using this he will die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If the target person thinks, “using that, I shall die,” and he does what is painful, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

Bu-Pj.3.4.8MS.438Medicine means: if he gives ghee, butter, oil, honey or molasses,[16] thinking, “having tasted this, he will die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. When the target person tastes it and experiences pain, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

Bu-Pj.3.4.9MS.439Arranging a sight[17] means: in arranging a dreadful and terrifying sight, thinking, “seeing this and becoming terrified, he will die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If the target person sees it and becomes terrified, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion. In arranging a lovely sight, thinking, “seeing this and then not being able to obtain it, he will wither BD.1.134 and die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If the target person sees it and then withers because of not obtaining it, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

MS.440Arranging a sound means: in arranging a dreadful and terrifying sound, thinking, “hearing this and becoming terrified, he will die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If the target person hears it and becomes terrified, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion. In arranging a lovely and heart-stirring[18] sound, thinking, “hearing this and then not being able to obtain it, he will wither and die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If the target person hears it and then withers because of not obtaining it, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

MS.441Arranging a smell means: in arranging a disgusting and repulsive smell, thinking, “smelling this, he will die from disgust and aversion,” there is an offence of bad conduct. When the target person smells it and experiences suffering because of disgust and aversion, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion. In arranging a lovely smell, thinking, “smelling this and then not being able to obtain it, he will wither and die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If the target person smells it and then withers because of not obtaining it, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

MS.442Arranging a taste means: in arranging a disgusting and repulsive taste, thinking, “tasting this, he will die from disgust and aversion,” there is an offence of bad conduct. When the target person tastes it and experiences suffering because of disgust and aversion, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion. In arranging a lovely taste, thinking, “tasting this and then not being able to obtain it, he will wither and die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If the target person tastes it and then withers because of not obtaining it, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

BD.1.135MS.443Arranging a touch means: Vin.3.78 in arranging a painful and harsh physical contact, thinking, “touched by this, he will die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. When the target person makes contact with it and experiences pain, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion. In arranging a pleasant and soft physical contact, thinking, “touched by this and then not being able to obtain it, he will wither and die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If the target person is touched by it and then withers because of not obtaining it, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

MS.444Arranging dhamma means: in talking about hell[19] to one destined to go to hell, thinking, “hearing this and becoming terrified, he will die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. When the target person hears it and becomes terrified, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion. In talking about heaven to someone of good behaviour,[20] thinking, “hearing this and being intent on it,[21] he will die,” there is an offence of bad conduct. When the target person hears it, becomes intent on it and thinks, “I shall die,” and he does what is painful, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

Bu-Pj.3.4.10MS.445Announcement means: if, being asked, he says, “die in this way;[22] he who dies like this receives wealth, fame or goes to heaven,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If, because of that announcement, the target person thinks, “I shall die,” and he does what is painful, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

MS.446Instruction means: if, without being asked, he says, “die in this way; he who dies like this receives wealth, fame or goes to heaven,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If, because of that instruction, the target thinks, “I shall die,” and he does what is painful, there is a serious offence. If he dies, there is an offence entailing expulsion.

MS.447An arranged action means: if he makes an arrangement for before the meal or for after the meal, BD.1.136 for the night or for the day, telling another person, “kill that person according to this arrangement,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If the other person kills that person according to that arrangement, there is an offence entailing expulsion for both. If he kills him before or after the arranged time, there is no offence for the instigator, but there is an offence entailing expulsion for the murderer.

MS.448Making a sign means: he makes a sign. If he says to another person, “when I wink, raise my eyebrow, or raise my head, at that sign kill that person,” there is an offence of bad conduct. If, at that sign, the other person kills that person, there is an offence entailing expulsion for both. If he kills him before or after the sign, there is no offence for the instigator, but there is an offence entailing expulsion for the murderer.

Footnotes and references:

Adhiṭṭhāya. Adhitiṭṭhati or adhiṭṭhahati, adhiṭṭhāti, adhiṭṭheti is a word of wide meaning. Critical Pali Dictionary includes above passage under “to determine, resolve, wish.” Vin-a.445 explains adhiṭṭhahitvā by samīpe ṭhatvā. On the “volitional force” of adhiṭṭhāna consult Mrs. Rhys Davids, The Birth of Indian Psychology and its Development in Buddhism, p.112. Adhiṭṭhita used in connection with robes at Vin.3.196.

lekhaṃ chindati, Vin-a.452, “he cuts syllables (akkharāni) on a leaf or a book (potthake, cf. Sanskrit pustaka). Cf.Ja.ii.90, akkharāni chinditvā, here on a kaṇḍa, a stalk or cane. Lekhaṃ chindati could not therefore here mean “destroys the letter” as Pali-English Dictionary says. Cf.rūpaṃ chindati at Vin-a.690 in connection with cutting a figure on the wooden māsaka. Lekhā therefore does not necessarily mean writing as we have it today. At Vin.4.7lekhā is one of the three “high crafts” (or occupations, sippa). At Vin.1.77 = Vin.4.128 Upāli’s parents decide against letting him learn lekhā on the grounds that his fingers will become painful. At Vin.4.305 it is said to be no offence for a nun to learn writing (lekhaṃ pariyāpuṇāti). Lekha is the writing, the letter; lekhā the line, the tracing (cf.Ja.6. 56). Vin-a.867 explains by akkharāni likhantassa. Cf.Vin-a.739lekhā ti akkharalekhā, letters: syllables or letters; see next note for akkhara.
At Vin.2.110 the context seems to demand another meaning for lekhā: it is to be something that can be separated from the bowl; this can be given away, whereas lekhañ ca me paribhogaṃ bhavissati, “so that the chips shall remain my property” (Vinaya Texts iii.78), or “the chips will come to be for my personal use,” or “the chips will be of use to me.” (Paribhoga is that which one uses, of use, rather than property.) At this passage lekhaṃ (which has faulty variant reading likhaṃ; cf.likhāpaṇṇa for lekhā° at Pv-a.20) is almost certainly to be taken in its meaning of “chips, shavings.”
At AN.i.283 = Pp.32 three kinds of individuals are described: pāsāṇalekhūpama, pathavilekhūpama, udakalekhūpama. Here lekhā is translated at GS.i.262 by “carving.” Neither Commentary remarks on lekhā.

akkharakkharāya, or “for the syllables and syllables” so “for each syllable.” Critical Pali Dictionary says that akkhara is opposed to pada, word. Akkhara seems to be connected with akṣara of the Upaniṣads, the Imperishable—perhaps because the letters when engraved could faintly emulate the Imperishable (Veda).

Tiracchānagatamanussaviggaha, literally a man taking up the form of one going as an animal. This is obviously meant to be something different from tiracchānagata, going as an animal, just below. The former probably refers to an animal who has the power to put on human form in this life; for this is a belief which existed at that time. Cf. the rule which forbids an animal in human form to be ordained, Vin.1.86, Vin.1.87. The latter, going as an animal, or just an animal, is a fairly forceful expression in connection with the belief in rebirth, meaning that someone is going as an animal in this rebirth.

Vin-a.455 says, “It was dug for a man, (therefore) he is not guilty of the death of yakkhas and so forth who fall into it.” In the Vinaya, yakkhas constantly appear as the denizens of some sphere or other, not far removed from the realm of mankind. The same is true of the petas, or departed ones.

It is curious that the five senses are all equally powerful here, and that the last three are not grouped together under muta, sensed, felt, thought or imagined, as sometimes occurs in the older literature, e.g. Vin.4.2. It is also curious that these five senses have the power to cause death. Was it really believed that people died because of a bad smell or loud noise?